Justice Reinvestment in Alabama
2nd Presentation to Prison Reform Task Force September 30, 2014 Andy Barbee, Research Manager Marc Pelka, Program Director Patrick Armstrong, Policy Analyst Cassondra Warney, Program Associate
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center • Na4onal nonprofit, nonpar4san membership associa4on of state government officials • Engages members of all three branches of state government • Jus4ce Center provides prac4cal, nonpar4san advice informed by the best available evidence
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
2
Goal of jus4ce reinvestment and our funding partners
Justice Reinvestment
a data-‐driven approach to reduce corrections spending and reinvest savings in strategies that can decrease recidivism and increase public safety
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
3
Data requests to stakeholders have been mostly fulfilled Data Type
Status
Source
-‐ Sentencing
Sentencing Commission
-‐ Pretrial diversion
District AJorneys
-‐ Problem-‐solving courts
Pend.
Administra4ve Office of the Courts
-‐ Jail -‐ Community Correc4ons
Coun4es -‐ u4lized statewide surveys of sheriffs and CCPs to collect basic informa4on
-‐ Prison
Department of Correc4ons
-‐ Proba4on supervision -‐ Parole decision-‐making -‐ Parole supervision
Board of Pardons and Paroles
-‐ Criminal history informa4on
Pend.
Criminal Jus4ce Informa4on Center
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
4
Update on criminal jus4ce system stakeholder engagement since June working group mee4ng On-‐site Mee9ngs with Stakeholders Proba9on/Parole & Community Correc9ons 4 days around state holding 9 focus groups with proba4on and parole officers and staff from CCPS, represen4ng 15 coun4es Judges and Prosecutors Working lunch discussions in three circuits LIFE Tech Visit to residen4al transi4on center in Thomasville County Officials Mee4ng with nine county-‐level representa4ves, including county aJorneys, commissioners, jail administrators, and community correc4ons directors
Calls with Stakeholders and Review of Policy/Prac9ce • 60+ hours spent on calls with stakeholders • 100+ hours reviewing sentencing and correc4ons law, proba4on & parole policies, CCP standards
Statewide Surveys • Proba4on/parole and community correc4ons supervision prac4ces • County jail popula4ons
Data Analysis • Over 250,000 data records analyzed across felony sentencing and ADOC prison in/outs
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
5
Alabama’s prisons are significantly over capacity ADOC Popula9on and Capacity, 2002 – 2014 35,000 ADOC “Jurisdic.onal” Popula.on 32,235 30,000
25,000
27,656
ADOC “Custody” Popula.on 26,265
24,619 24,298
ADOC “In-‐House” Facili.es Popula.on 25,020
20,000
15,000
12,459
ADOC Facili.es Design Capacity 13,318
What would it cost Alabama to build its way out of the current situa9on? Achieving 130% opera4onal capacity requires adding 6,000 prison beds: v Construc4on costs = $420m v Annual opera4ng costs = $93m Achieving 100% opera4onal capacity requires adding 12,000 prison beds:
10,000
5,000
0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014*
v Construc4on costs = $840m v Annual opera4ng costs = $186m
Source: Annual Reports and Monthly Reports, Alabama Department of Correc4ons; Alabama Legisla4ve Fiscal Office es4mates $102 million construc4on cost for 1,500 bed facility; ADOC inmate opera4ng cost = $42.54 per day, 2012 Annual Report.
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
6
One of every five General Fund dollars is spent on correc4ons Agency Total State General Fund
FY2015
Appropria9on
% of Total State General Fund
$1.995 Billion
ADOC
$399.8 m
20%
ABPP
$ 27.3 m
1%
Agency
FY2002
% of Total State General Fund
Total State General Fund
Expenditure
To build to 130% of capacity, the $420 million in construc4on costs alone would be the equivalent of another 21% of the total state general fund.
$1.268 Billion
ADOC
$197.4 m
15%
ABPP
$ 13.9 m
1%
Source: Alabama Legisla4ve Fiscal Office
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
7
In June, Alabama launched its Jus4ce Reinvestment project In February 2014, SJR 20 establishes the Alabama Prison Reform Task Force
“Jus4ce Reinvestment is an opportunity for Alabama to examine the criminal jus4ce system in order to reduce prison crowding and increase public safety” Governor Bentley Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
8
1
q Fewer arrests, felony convic4ons, and sentences to prison since 2009
2
q One in three prison inmates currently eligible for parole
3
q 40% of prison admissions are individuals who were unsuccessful on supervision
q Presump4ve guidelines are further reducing sentences to prison Sentencing Trends q Nevertheless, prison overcrowding levels persist
q Parole release rate declining, resul4ng in fewer releases and longer prison stays Prison Trends q One in three people released from prison are unsupervised
Community q Stopping this revolving door will require more effec4ve supervision and treatment Supervision q Other states demonstrate poten4al to reinvest and reduce recidivism Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
9
Sentencing Trends
Prison Trends
Community Supervision
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
10
Alabama felony sentencing lacks a consistent philosophy Convic9on for Felony Offense
County Jail
Proba9on (Pardons and Paroles)
Prison
Community Correc9ons
o County jail up to three years; not eligible for good 4me; can also be a split sentence o Community correc9ons intended as a diversion from prison ü State reimburses CCPs for clients that are prison diversions
Split Sentence § Not eligible for good 8me or parole § Release is controlled by the sentencing court § Release to proba4on
Straight Sentence § Eligible for good 8me* § Release is controlled by Parole Board § Release to parole or to no supervision * Exclusions are Class A felons, sentences longer than 15 years, and cases involving sex offenses against a child.
Source: Sentencing Reference Manual for Circuit and District Judges (Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Sentencing Commission, Summer 2012)
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
11
Alabama’s adop4on of sentencing guidelines began in 2003 Sentencing Reform Act
Presump9ve Sentencing Guidelines
Sentencing Guidelines
of 2003
§ Sentencing Commission to develop voluntary sentencing guidelines
Effec9ve 10/1/2006 § Person, Property, and Drug
§ Purpose: public safety, efficient use of resources, certainty/ fairness in sentencing, prevent overcrowding and premature release of prisoners
§ Includes historical sentencing prac4ces, statutory minimums and enhancements, habitual offender law
Effec9ve 10/1/2013 § Property and Drug offenses only § No longer voluntary
Act 2012-‐473
Made the property and drug guidelines presump4ve for use by courts
§ Voluntary
2003
2006
2009
2012
2013
Notes about Presump4ve Sentencing Guidelines: ü Covered Property offenses exclude all Burglary offenses ü Defines aggrava4ng and mi4ga4ng factors that allow for departure ü Departures from guidelines are appealable Source: Presump8ve and Voluntary Sentencing Standards Manual, Effec8ve October 1, 2013 (Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Sentencing Commission, 2013)
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
12
62% of all felony cases are subject to the presump4ve sentencing guidelines Offense Type
Person FY2013 (16%) Felony Convic4ons Property (41%)
2,914 Subject to Presump8ve Guidelines 7,325 4,722
17,983
Drug
6,708
Other
1,036
6,385
(37%)
(6%)
q 62% of the FY2013 felony convic4ons were for offenses that are subject to the presump4ve sentencing guidelines that became effec4ve 10/1/2013. ü 64% of all property offenses ü 95% of all drug offenses Primary property and drug offenses not subject to the presump8ve guidelines include all burglary classes and drug trafficking.
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
13
Significant declines in arrest ac4vity since 2009, yet smaller declines in felony sentences Arrest and Felony Sentencing Trends, 2009–2013 Violent Index Violent Index Arrests
6,672 6,111
2009
Property Index Property Index Arrests
2013 22,677
Drug Drug Arrests Arrests
17,156
10,930
Felony Felony Sentences Sentences
17,983 0
5,000
10,000
Volume decline 2009 to 2013: q Violent index arrests
-‐ 561
q Property index arrests q Drug arrests
-‐ 3,762 -‐ 6,226
q Subtotal decline
-‐ 10,549
26,439
15,000
20,000
21,184 25,000
30,000
Despite a drop of more than 10,000 arrests per year, sentences have only declined by a liJle over 3,000.
Source: Crime in Alabama Annual Reports, Alabama Criminal Jus4ce Informa4on Center; Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
14
Declines in volume of robbery and possession of controlled substance cases drove overall decline in sentences Convic4ons for robbery went from 961 in FY2009 to 637 in FY2013…a 34% drop.
Felony Sentences by Offense Category, FY2009 and FY2013 25,000
20,000
15,000
Total Sentences = 21,184 2,862 513 7,774
Total Sentences = 17,983 2,430 484 7,325
10,000
5,000
8,966
0
1,069
1,036
FY2009
FY2013
Person_Non-‐Sex
-‐ 15%
Person_Sex
-‐ 6%
Property
-‐ 6%
Drug
-‐ 25%
Other
-‐ 3%
6,708
Convic4ons for possession of controlled substance went from 5,038 in FY2009 to 3,353 in FY2013…a 33% drop.
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
15
Community correc4ons accounts for about 12% of sentences overall and about 20% of sentences to ADOC Felony Sentences by Specific Sentence, FY2010–FY2013 22,500
1,845 18,000
7,787 13,500
9,000
1,573
1,434
1,323 Jail/Other
7,243
6,843
6,337 Proba9on
2,276
2,226
2,188 Community Correc9ons
11,214
8,915
4,500
Community Correc4ons and 8,135 Prison Prison combined make up the “ADOC” sentences.
8,652
0
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Note: Sentencing data unable to iden8fy community correc8ons sentences prior to FY2011.
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
16
Early indica4ons are that presump4ve sentencing guidelines have further reduced sentences to prison Felony Sentences to Prison, October-‐June FY2011–FY2014 1,200 1,000 800
FY2011 FY2012 FY2013
600
FY2014 Presump4ve guidelines effec4ve beginning of FY2014 October -‐ June
400 200 0 Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Sentences to Prison
% Change
FY2011
6,932
-‐-‐-‐
FY2012
6,664
-‐ 4%
FY2013
6,260
-‐6%
FY2014
5,253
-‐16%
FY2011–FY2014 % change
-‐24%
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
17
How are presump4ve guidelines impac4ng the disposi4ons of high volume felony offense types? Convic4ons for Possession/Receipt of a Controlled Substance
Prior to Presump.ve Sentencing Guidelines
AMer Presump.ve Sentencing Guidelines
October 2013 -‐ June 2014 = 2,376
October 2012 -‐ June 2013 = 2,526
36% to Prison
14% to Community Correc4ons
42% to Proba4on
26% to Prison
15% to Community Correc4ons
50% to Proba4on
Clear shi[ towards proba8on instead of prison Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
18
Presump4ve guidelines have impacted a decline of more than 20% in sentences to prison for covered offenses Prison Sentences for High Volume Offenses Subject to the Presump9ve Guidelines, October – June of each Fiscal Year
FY2013
FY2014
% Change
912
629
-‐31%
DISTRIBUTION CONTROL SUBSTANCE
396
319
-‐19%
THEFT OF PROPERTY 1ST
365
343
-‐6%
THEFT OF PROPERTY 2ND
349
282
-‐19%
POSS MARIHUANA 1ST
225
177
-‐21%
POSS FORGED INSTRUMENT 2ND
162
120
-‐26%
MANUFACTURING CONT SUBS 2ND
232
165
-‐29%
BREAKING/ENTERING A VEHICLE
162
100
-‐38%
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY 1ST
95
113
+19%
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY 2ND
113
75
-‐34%
FRAUD/ILL USE CREDIT/DEBIT CARD
90
62
-‐31%
MANUFACTURING CONT SUBS 1ST
86
114
+33%
FORGERY 2ND
33
18
-‐46%
3,220
2,517
-‐22%
Most Serious Offense at Convic4on POSS/REC CONTROL SUBSTANCE
Subtotal Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
19
Even with the large volume diverted at sentencing, property/drug account for two-‐thirds of prison admissions Distribu9on of Felony Disposi9ons by Offense and Sentence Type, FY2014 Other
Person
(1,038)
(3,030)
Prison (6,825)
442
Drug
(7,052)
(6,495)
2,478
2,083
1,822
63 Community Correc9ons (2,281)
207
Proba9on (6,642)
622
Other (1,867)
Property
Total Es8mated Cases = 17,615
378
1,001
1,010
402
2,836
2,782
131
737
621
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
20
Unclear ra4onale for using a split sentence versus straight sentence to prison FY2014 Sentences to Prison by Type of Sentence for Person, Property, and Drug Offenses
Person Split (20)
Property
Drug Split (20) 3%
Split (20) 3% 20%
54%
Straight
Straight 63%
Straight 60% Split (15) 38%
26%
34% Split (15)
Split (15)
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
21
Presump4ve guidelines are driving a decrease in the average sentence length imposed for straight sentences to prison Prison Sentence Lengths for Offense Types Subject to Presump9ve Sentencing Guidelines, FY2011–FY2014 Months
120 100
96
Straight
80
74
Decline of 23%
60 40 20
36 16
Split (20)
34
Split (15)
15
0 FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
22
Summary of sentencing trends Major declines in arrests and overall volume of felony convic9ons
Sentences to prison and also sentence lengths declining for property and drug offenses
But these front-‐ end dynamics have not generated relief for the level of overcrowding
1. If these trends had not materialized, the overcrowding situa4on would be even worse. 2. To sustain and build on impacts, sentencing policy changes need to go further.
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
23
Sentencing Trends
Prison Trends
Community Supervision
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
24
More than a third of all property and drug inmates are serving sentences that are ineligible for good 4me June 2014 “Person” Prisoners by Sentence Length 40% 30%
79% of person inmates are in on sentences exceeding 15 years.
June 2014 “Property” Prisoners by Sentence Length 40% 30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
38% of property inmates are in on sentences exceeding 15 years.
June 2014 “Drug” Prisoners by Sentence Length 40% 30%
32% of drug inmates are in on sentences exceeding 15 years.
20% 10% 0%
Equal percentages of property and drug offenders are serving life and life without parole sentences as are serving two-‐years-‐or-‐less sentences
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison popula4on data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
25
One-‐third of current property and drug inmates are eligible for release to parole Distribu9on of ADOC “Custody” Popula9on, June 30, 2014 Total = 26,275 Splits
Pre-‐parole
Person
(14,321 Inmates)
11%
Property
Drug
(6,017)
(4,616)
24%
25%
Other
(1,321)
22%
39% 36%
Eligible for Ini9al Parole
12%
Parole Violator
9%
19%
38%
38%
20% 33%
Life w/o Parole, Death
29%
100%
16%
11%
5%
6%
100%
100%
4% 3%
100%
Ini4al Parole Eligible Popula4on As of June 30, 2014, approximately 4,283 inmates were eligible for ini4al parole. Offense types: – 1,761 person – 1,171 property – 913 drug – 438 other
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison popula4on data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
26
Rate of parole release among eligible popula4on declined
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Ini4al Parole Eligible Popula4on
4,338
3,992
3,976
4,055
4,181
Parole Violator Popula4on
2,939
2,997
2,998
2,841
2,736
Total Parole Eligible Popula9on
7,277
6,989
6,974
6,896
6,917
Actual Releases to Parole
3,076
2,962
2,360
2,282
2,495
Parole Releases as Percent of Eligible
42%
42%
34%
33%
36%
+
=
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison popula4on and releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
27
More than 1,000 parole eligible property and drug inmates have been eligible for ini4al parole for more than one year ADOC “Custody” inmates eligible for ini9al parole by number of months eligible, June 30, 2014
1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0
600 500 400 300 200 100 0
1,235
Person Offenses (1,761)
52
89
70% of Total 123
263
(913)
226 67
Property Offenses (1,171)
36
86
537 353
46% of Total
127
477
Drug Offenses
34
600 500 400 300 200 100 0
108
52% of Total
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison popula4on data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
28
Length of incarcera4on prior to parole has increased 43% Months in Prison for Releases to Parole, FY2009–FY2014 FY2009
30
FY2010
29
FY2011
Length of stay in prison for those released to parole grew by 13 months from FY2009 to FY2014.
34
FY2012
35
FY2013
40
FY2014
ü Increase of 43%
43
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mos
What factors might be contribu4ng to the increasing length of 4me individuals are incarcerated prior to being released on parole? Ø Especially in light of the fact that the sentence lengths of those sentenced to prison since 2009 has not increased Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
29
Length of stay in prison for parole violators is increasing Length of Stay in Prison for Parole Violators Released from ADOC Custody, FY2009 and FY2014 Months
64
70
42% longer
60 50
45
Parole violators are spending 19 months longer in prison (FY2009 to FY2014)
40 30 20 10 0 FY2009
FY2013
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
30
Length of incarcera4on for those released to no supervision has increased 38% Months in Prison for End of Sentence Releases, FY2009–FY2014 FY2009
24
FY2010
Length of stay in prison for those discharged from sentence grew by nine months from FY2009 to FY2014.
28
FY2011
29
FY2012
30
FY2013
33
FY2014
33
0
10
20
30
ü Increase of 38% 40
Months
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
31
People returning to the community unsupervised make up the largest share of prison releases Releases from ADOC Custody by Type of Release, FY2009–FY2013 10,000
Total Releases
9,182
9,000 8,000
8,284 2,687
2,911
Proba9on (split sentences) 2,780
7,000
2,858
2,736
6,000 5,000
3,076
2,962
4,000
2,360
Parole (straight sentences) 2,282
3,000 2,000
End of Sentence 3,174
3,204
3,098
245
209 FY2010
239
1,000 0
2,495
FY2009
FY2011
2,694
2,852
186 FY2012
201 Other FY2013
34% of total prison releases in FY2013
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
32
“End of sentence (EOS)” prison releases impose system costs and risks to public safety Releases from ADOC Custody by Type of Release, FY2009–FY2013 10,000 9,000
8,284
8,000
Proba9on (split sentences)
7,000
2,736
6,000 5,000
Parole (straight sentences)
4,000
2,495
3,000 2,000
End of Sentence
1,000
2,852
0
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
EOS from ADOC custody comprised of two groups:
FY2012
FY2013
82% property, drug, & other offense types
Average length of stay in prison = 23 months Highest likelihood of reoffending
18% person offense types
Average length of stay in prison = 77 months More serious offense types separated from society longer
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
33
Summary of prison trends
One in three prison inmates currently eligible for parole
Parole release rate declining, resul9ng in fewer releases and longer prison stays
One in three people released from prison are unsupervised
1. What is contribu4ng to the longer lengths of stay and declining volume of parole releases? 2. Are there beJer approaches to sentencing and release that can reduce the volume released from prison without any supervision? Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
34
Sentencing Trends
Prison Trends
Community Supervision
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
35
67% of people in Alabama’s felony criminal jus4ce system are being supervised in the community ADOC Custody Popula4on
Proba4on
33%
53%
Community Correc4ons Parole 4% 10%
Two-‐thirds of Alabama’s felony criminal jus4ce popula4on is supervised in the community
Proba9on
CCPs
Parole
44,854
3,739
8,391
State Invest. per Client
$1.40 / day
$6.73* / day
$1.40 / day
Avg. Supervision Term
36 months
18 months
42 months
Avg. Popula4on
* CCP cost per day based on “reimbursable” daily popula4on of 2,239 on 7/31/2014.
Source: Alabama Sentencing Commission felony sentencing data; Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles proba4on and parole popula4on data and parole entries data; FY2013 Annual Report, Alabama Department of Correc4ons; and Alabama Legisla4ve Fiscal Office
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
36
40% of all admissions to ADOC custody are violators of either proba4on or parole Admissions to ADOC Custody by Type of Admission
FY2013 Total Admissions = 8,313 129 Other
Proba4on revoca4ons and parole violators combined represented 3,326 prison admissions in FY2013.
939 Parole Violators Proba8on Revoca8ons 2,387
New Commits 4,858
Ø According to ADOC intake screening, 39% had either a substance abuse or mental health need (or both).
Source: Alabama Department of Correc4ons prison releases data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
37
Ini4al findings indicate opportuni4es for improvement in targe4ng by risk, treatment investments, and accountability Targe9ng by Risk ü Surprisingly large share of proba4oners on medium intensity supervision ü Result is poten4al for both over-‐ and under-‐supervision ü CCPs serve large number of low risk
Resources for Treatment ü Clear indica4ons of gaps in capacity to provide substance abuse and mental health treatment ü Lack of clear policies around targe4ng resources to the highest risk popula4ons
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
Sanc9oning and Accountability ü Caseloads of almost 200 cases per officer make it hard to ensure accountability ü Long stays in jail awai4ng viola4on hearings ü Lack of structured sanc4oning approach resul4ng in inconsistent approach to responding to supervision viola4ons 38
Reducing recidivism requires targe4ng high-‐risk to priori4ze resources for their supervision and treatment Risk
Assess risk of reoffense and focus supervision on the highest-‐risk offenders
Assess for Risk Level…
…and Focus Accordingly LOW 10% rearrested
MODERATE 35% rearrested
HIGH 70% rearrested
Low Supervision/ Program Intensity
Moderate Supervision/ Program Intensity
Risk of Reoffending LOW 10% rearrested
MODERATE 35% rearrested
HIGH 70% rearrested
High Supervision/ Program Intensity
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
39
Opportuni4es exist to adopt policies targe4ng and priori4zing resources based on assessed risk and need Survey results:
§ Only 24% of proba4on/parole survey respondents place “high” value in risk assessments. § CCP respondents indicated that approximately 48% of their felony client popula4on are low risk. q ABPP data indicate that only 20% of proba4oners are supervised at the minimum level. – Analyses are pending, but the share of the proba8on popula8on that is low risk is likely higher than 20%. Policy review:
Community correc4ons minimum standards do not direct programs to differen4ate supervision and treatment based on assessment of risk and need. Source: CSG Jus4ce Center electronic survey of Alabama proba4on and parole officers, August 2014 (234 proba4on and parole supervising officers completed the survey); CSG Jus4ce Center electronic survey of Alabama community correc4ons program, August 2014 (41 community correc4ons providers completed the survey); Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles proba4on and parole popula4on data
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
40
Lack of substance abuse services for those on supervision reflected in surveys Substance Abuse Service Availability Survey Results Non-‐ Existent
100%
Rarely Available
80%
Some4mes Available Usually Available Readily Available
60%
1% 20%
38%
40%
25% 20% 0%
3% 18% 29% 27%
17%
24%
Proba9on/ Prob/Par Parole
Community CCP Correc9ons
A majority of survey respondents indicated that substance abuse services are only some4mes available, rarely available, or non-‐ existent.
Source: CSG Jus4ce Center electronic survey of Alabama proba4on and parole officers, August 2014 (234 proba4on and parole supervising officers completed the survey); CSG Jus4ce Center electronic survey of Alabama community correc4ons program, August 2014 (41 community correc4ons providers completed the survey)
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
41
Mental health services are even more scarce Substance Abuse Service Availability Survey Results Non-‐ Existent
100%
Rarely Available
80%
Some4mes Available Usually Available Readily Available
6%
3%
40%
47%
60% 40%
28%
20%
15%
0%
11% Proba9on/ Prob/Par Parole
29%
An even larger majority of survey respondents indicated that mental health services are only some4mes available, rarely available, or non-‐existent.
15% 6% Community CCP Correc9ons
Source: CSG Jus4ce Center electronic survey of Alabama proba4on and parole officers, August 2014 (234 proba4on and parole supervising officers completed the survey); CSG Jus4ce Center electronic survey of Alabama community correc4ons program, August 2014 (41 community correc4ons providers completed the survey)
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
42
Ability of supervised popula4ons to access behavioral health treatment greatly reduced over recent years State General Fund Appropria9ons for Board of Pardons & Paroles and Dept. of Mental Health, FY2008-‐FY2015
Board of Pardons & Paroles $45,000,000
$150,000,000
$41.8m
$36,000,000
$120,000,000
$27.3m
$27,000,000 $18,000,000 $9,000,000
Dept. of Mental Health $144.9m $105.5m
$90,000,000 $60,000,000
Current appropria4ons are 35% lower than FY2009.
$0
$30,000,000
Current appropria4ons are 27% lower than FY2009.
$0
Source: Alabama Legisla4ve Fiscal Office
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
43
Alabama needs a more structured approach to respond to supervision viola4ons swiyly, consistently, and cost-‐effec4vely Aim
Swiyness
Consistency
Cost-‐effec4veness
Supervision viola4ons are responded to meaningfully without delay
Finding – 43% of proba4oners in jail awai4ng a viola4on hearing are there longer than 2 weeks
– Varia4on across state in process for sanc4oning Graduated range of sanc4ons and incen4ves guide specific – Largely dependent on responses to viola4ons local culture and court schedule Priori4ze most expensive, restric4ve sanc4ons for offenders commizng the most serious viola4ons
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
– LiJle evidence of use of swiy and certain sanc4ons
44
States are using tailored revoca4on terms to respond to supervision viola4ons WA
OR
ID
Eligible Popula4on
WY PA
NV
Parole
OH CO
KS
MO
OK
TX
HI
LA
WV
MS
Proba4on
NC AL
Proba4on and Parole
GA
Alabama’s Proba4on Revoca4on Caps §15-‐22-‐54
Court may “modify Proba8oners with the condi4ons of any prior or proba4on, current convic8on including short for a violent periods of offense are incarcera4on, not ineligible. to exceed 90 days.”
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
45
North Carolina focused on improving proba4on and has dropped their prison popula4on 45,000
(JRA passed in June 2011)
43,220"
Pre-‐JR Baseline
38,264"
JR Legisla9on Es9mate
41,030"
40,000 37,192" 35,000
(December 31, 2013)
36,659"
Actual Prison Popula9on
Since JR Enactment: • State re-‐priori9zed over $8 million into treatment
30,000
• 9% drop in prison popula9on • 43% drop in proba9on revoca9ons • $560 million es9mated averted costs and savings by FY2017
25,000
• 10 prisons closed since 2011 • 175 new proba9on officers hired in 2013 20,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
36% of 2006 release cohort
29% of 2010 release cohort
Index Crime Down 18.1% (2007 to 2012)
Three Year Return to Prison Rate Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
46
Key feature of North Carolina’s approach was development of a “Swiy & Certain” philosophy to sanc4oning viola4ons DATA Supervision viola4on hearings are 4me-‐consuming, frequently delayed, and oyen result in reinstatement on supervision
There are few meaningful graduated sanc4ons for minor condi4on viola4ons
POLICY CHANGE
53%
of prison admissions are proba9on revoca9ons
75%
of revoca4ons are for condi9on viola9ons
Administra4ve Jail Sanc4ons
&
Tailored Prison Sanc4ons
2-‐3 day sanc4on
90 day sanc4on
Capped at 6 days
Capped at 3 revoca9ons
Designed to: • Reduce viola4on hearings • Reduce 4me in court • Reduce jail 4me spent awai4ng hearings
(drug use, absconding) Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
47
Alabama has some promising features to build on
Proba9on and Parole
LIFE Tech Transi9on Center
Birmingham Day Repor9ng Center
Residen4al program offering substance abuse and mental health treatment, and cogni4ve-‐ behavioral interven4ons ü 89% success rate 350 slots
Intensive substance abuse treatment and cogni4ve-‐behavioral interven4ons; assist w/ life skills assistance Grant-‐funded
Growing Use of CCPs 4,000
Community Correc9ons
Popula4on up 230% FY2006 to FY2014
Building from Research 3,673
3,000 2,000 1,000
1,114
0
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
CCPs such as Jefferson Co. and Montgomery Co. demonstrate incorpora4on of evidence-‐based prac4ces and commitment to measuring outcomes.
48
Summary of supervision analysis
1. Risk assessment and targe4ng of resources according to risk are poorly incorporated into supervision prac4ces. 2. Major gaps in capacity to deliver substance abuse and mental health treatment. 3. Inconsistent and costly approach to sanc4oning viola4ons of supervision.
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
49
1
q Fewer arrests, felony convic4ons, and sentences to prison since 2009
2
q One in three prison inmates currently eligible for parole
3
q 40% of prison admissions are individuals who were unsuccessful on supervision
q Presump4ve guidelines are further reducing sentences to prison Sentencing Trends q Level of overcrowding persists
q Parole release rate declining, resul4ng in fewer releases and longer prison stays Prison Trends q One in three people released from prison are unsupervised
Community q Stopping this revolving door will require more effec4ve supervision and treatment Supervision q Other states demonstrate poten4al to reinvest and reduce recidivism Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
50
Next steps q Con4nued engagement with key stakeholders • • • • • •
Circuit Court Judges Sheriffs Prosecutors County level officials Defense aJorneys Advocacy groups
q Third Task Force mee4ng in early December • Analysis of parole process • Feedback from stakeholder engagement
q Fourth and final Task Force mee4ng in late January • Presenta4on of policy recommenda4ons
q Final report release in early February Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
51
Proposed project 4meline Task Force Mee4ng 4: Policy Op4on Rollout
Task Force Mee4ng 2
Press Conference & Project Launch Task Force Mee4ng 1
May
Jun
Final Report
Task Force Mee4ng 3
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Bill introduc4on
Jan
Feb
2015 Session
Data Analysis Ini4al Analysis
Detailed Data Analysis
Impact Analysis
Policymaker and Stakeholder Engagement Stakeholder Engagement and Policymaker Briefings
Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
Policy Op4on Development
Ongoing Engagement
52
Thank You
Patrick Armstrong Policy Analyst parmstrong@csg.org
Cassondra Warney Program Associate cwarney@csg.org
C S G J U S T I C E C E N T E R . O R G / S U B S C R I B E This material was prepared for the State of Alabama. The presenta4on was developed by members of the Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center staff. Because presenta4ons are not subject to the same rigorous review process as other printed materials, the statements made herein reflect the views of the author and should not be considered the official posi4on of the Jus4ce Center, the members of the Council of State Governments, or the funding agency suppor4ng the work. Council of State Governments Jus4ce Center
53